New Tax Reform Bill Stifles #MeToo Settlement Deductions

Wednesday, January 10, 2018

In acknowledgment of the recent sexual misconduct allegations and the confidential settlements in connection with those allegations, Congress added a new section 162(q) to the Internal Revenue Code as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The new section prohibits companies from deducting costs related to sexual assault and sexual harassment settlements that are subject to nondisclosure agreements. While motivation for this new provision was a well-intentioned nod to the #MeToo movement, this new provision may have unforeseen consequences.

Section 13307 of the Act provides as follows:

PAYMENTS RELATED TO SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND SEXUAL ABUSE.—No deduction shall be allowed under this chapter for—

“(1) any settlement or payment related to sexual harassment or sexual abuse if such settlement or payment is subject to a nondisclosure agreement, or

“(2) attorney's fees related to such a settlement or payment.”

Prior to the inclusion of this provision, the law permitted tax deductions for confidential settlement arrangements and attorneys’ fees incurred in connection with these settlement arrangements. The law did not specifically address settlement arrangements containing claims of sexual harassment or sexual abuse.

The new provision was likely designed to deter companies from seeking nondisclosure agreements in connection with sexual assault and sexual harassment settlements and to consequently protect victims of sexual harassment. However, this provision of the Act raises a number of questions that remain unsettled:

First, will this new provision actually deter companies from entering into confidentiality agreements in connection with settlement arrangements in the future? It is unclear whether the tax benefits would outweigh the benefits of a nondisclosure agreement from an employer’s perspective. It is arguable that in certain situations, an employer may find it more valuable to keep the sexual harassment or sexual abuse settlement confidential than to receive a deduction.

Second, the provision states that “no deduction shall be allowed under this chapter.” (Emphasis added.) If this provision is interpreted literally, it would mean that the provision would apply to all of Chapter 1 of the tax code, which covers business entities and individuals. Consequently, it could preclude deductibility for not only the employer but also the plaintiff.

What is the definition of a claim related to “sexual harassment” or “sexual abuse”? Neither term is defined in the Act. What if the settlement arrangement consists of a variety of claims? The new legislation does not appear to address this possibility.

Further, what is the actual effect of this provision on the victims of sexual harassment? Under the Act, victims of sexual harassment may be required to pay taxes on the full amount of the settlement they receive if the settlement is subject to a nondisclosure agreement, even where a portion of the settlement payment goes to their attorneys for legal fees. This may result in lower net settlement amounts for plaintiffs. Moreover, this may discourage sexual harassment victims from coming forward at all. The provision seems to ignore the fact that a victim may prefer to keep his or her claim confidential.

Do the sexual harassment or sexual abuse claims need to be actually proven for this provision to apply, or does it apply to allegations of sexual harassment or sexual abuse?

Is the prohibition on deductions for attorneys’ fees limited to the fees associated with the drafting and negotiation of the settlement arrangement, or does it extend to all of the fees associated with the settlement?

Because of the numerous questions resulting from this provision of the Act, many commentators are predicting the issuance of technical corrections to the Act in the upcoming year. Until then, employers and employees alike may want to be cautious in applying this law. Importantly, employers can continue to require that their employees participate in sexual harassment and misconduct trainings to avoid sexual harassment and sexual abuse from occurring in the workplace.

Alexandra Orsini joined the Washington, D.C. office of Ogletree Deakins in 2017 as an associate in the executive compensation and employee benefits practice group.

Ms. Orsini focuses her practice on executive compensation and employee benefit matters, including drafting and implementing employee benefit plan documents, equity compensation documents and employment, severance, and other compensation-related arrangements for private and public companies and non-profit entities. She also advises on other employee benefits and executive compensation...

Mr. Rosner devotes his practice to a variety of plan design, compliance, and administration issues in matters relating to employee benefits and related areas of tax law. He has particular experience with benefit plan correction programs. Mr. Rosner routinely prepares and submits filings to the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Labor.

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com intended to be a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional. NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us.

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.

The National Law Review - National Law Forum LLC 4700 Gilbert Ave. Suite 47 #230 Western Springs, IL 60558 Telephone (708) 357-3317 If you would ike to contact us via email please click here.